|
WanderingLamb -> How to vote your conscience when your conscience is divided? (10/28/2009 2:48:05 AM)
|
Hi. I wasn't sure whether to put this in the Current Events folder or the Homosexuality One Stop Thread (sorry but I hate one stop threads!), but since this is really about my inner struggle, I decided to put it here. We have a Referendum Measure on our ballot in our state (WA, USA) for November 3. It is regarding gay marriage, although they're not technically calling it that. My dillemna is this: while I belileve that God hates homosexuality, I am not entirely comfortable with forcing my views on others. At first I thought it was cut and dried: I would vote to not approve the measure to give homosexual couples *(see note) the same rights as married couples. I don't want to support gay marriage in any way. That would be like making a statement of legitimization or approval, right? But on the other hand, part of me wonders if it is right to keep their rights limited. I mean, aside from the fact that my vote counts very little in the scheme of things, and this was already approved until a coalition of us religious folk (I wasn't one of them) decided to get it put on the ballot, I know that my "opinion" about their lifestyle isn't going to change things one iota. I mean, if this does not pass, these gay couples aren't going to suddenly break up and go straight. Likewise, people who would not otherwise have been in a gay lifestyle wouldn't suddenly decide to marry their best same-gender friend (at least I don't think so!) So I was thinking about the fact that this is a free country; that God actually gave us all (not just in my country[;)]) the freedom to disobey Him - so who am I to try to take away that freedom? Also, one person has said to me that gay marriage, or people living in a homosexual lifestyle, does not hurt others, so why have a law against it? It's not like murder - in fact this issue is not even in the ten commandments (unless you consider it to somehow break the law against adultery). But after thinking about that a while, I did think it could effect my children (through attitude changes and what is taught in school regarding the law), and it also effects the children of anyone in a gay partnership. But would this new law really change anything in that regard, compared to the status quo? (I know opponents of the measure say it will, but I don't see how - I only see that as a scare tactic) It only gives more rights to those already in that lifestyle. But I disagree that a homosexual lifestyle does not hurt those involved in it. Because I believe it is sinful, I believe it is harmful and unfulfilling (of course I don't know this from personal experience - I just take it on faith). But I can't shake the feeling that voting against gay marriage is sticking my nose in other people's business. So I was trying to think of something to compare it to...something that God says is sinful, but public opinion disagrees, something that does not directly hurt those not involved....But I couldn't quite find something to compare it to. Maybe gambling? Maybe porn? I don't know. I was also thinking about the Golden Rule. I personally know a few gay men. How would they feel if they knew I voted against them being able to go to the hospital when their partner is dying? I guess my point is, I don't see how witholding such rights from these registered same-sex couples is going to change anything about the problem of homosexuality. I mean, if we were talking about allowing such a thing in a church, there would be no question, I would be totally against it (in fact I know of some churches that do affirm homosexuality), but when we're talking about the general public, it just gets murky. I mean I'm totally against gay bashing and hate crimes! But at what point does the principle change from "do unto others..." to "hold back the moral decay of our society"? Thanks for reading my long post. I hope some of you have some helpful insights. I also hope that this will not turn into a debate thread. There are enough of those already. *(and non-married partners of the opposite sex, with one over the age of 65, I think - I know, why are they singled out?)
|
|
|
|